The Right Wing of America's
Roman Catholic Church

http://CatholicArrogance.Org/RC_ReligiousRight.html

Every once in a while in its two thousand year history there has been a brief period when liberals have gained the upper hand in the Roman Catholic Church. In early 2015, it appears that may be the case with Pope Francis at the helm. It remains to be seen just how liberal the church will become, or how long it will take for the conservatives to get the helm back, and for Roman Catholicism to get back to its normally conservative stance in the world. This web page was produced before the election of Pope Francis, so it may not reflect the situation at the time when you are reading this
There are very powerful reactionary forces in the Roman Catholic Church, both within the clergy and in the laity who are in high places in the secular world. This page is what you might call a "work in progress". It is mainly a repository of articles and/or examples illustrating how Conservative the Catholic Church is not just worldwide, but - despite the belief of many to the contrary - even in the U. S. A.

"It is ' false and absurd or rather mad', Pope Gregory XVI declared in 1832, 'that we must secure and guarantee to each one liberty of conscience; this is one of the most contagious of errors . . . To this is attached liberty of the press, the most dangerous liberty, an execrable liberty, which can never inspire sufficent horror.' " [ Constantine's Sword, p. 441
(In 1899, Pope Leo XIII even warned vaguely of a new heresy called "Americanism.")" : Evidence that the Catholic Church is the declared enemy of "Liberalism", "Modernism", "Americanism": The following quotes come from the ultra-Catholic www.biblebelievers.org.au /mason9.htm, which celebrates them:
"And so from this rotten source of indifferentism flows that absurd and erroneous opinion, or rather insanity, that liberty of conscience must be claimed and defended for anyone." (Pope Gregory XVI)
"For surely you know, Venerable Brothers, not a few are found who, applying the impious and absurd principles of naturalism, as they call it, to civil society, dare to teach that the "best plan for public society and civil progress absolutely requires that human society be established and governed with no regard to religion, as if it did not exist, or at least, without making distinction between the true and the false religions." (Pope Pius IX)
"And also, contrary to the teaching of Sacred Scripture, of the Church, and of the most holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that the best condition of society is the one in which there is no acknowledgment by the government of the duty of restraining, by established penalties, offenders of the Catholic religion, except insofar as the public peace demands." (Pope Pius IX)
"And, from this wholly false idea of social organization they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church and to the salvation of souls, called by Our predecessor of recent memory, Gregory XVI, 'insanity' ; namely that "liberty of conscience and of worship is the proper right of every man, and should be proclaimed and asserted by law in every correctly established society; that the right of all manner of liberty rests in the citizens, not to be restrained either by ecclesiastical or civil authority; and that by this right they can manifest openly and publicly and declare their own concepts, whatever they may be, by voice, by print, or in any other way." (Pius IX, pope from 1846 to 1878)

"It is an error to believe that the Roman Pontiff can and ought to reconcile himself to, and agree with, progress, liberalism, and contemporary civilization."

15. "It is an error to believe that every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true."

18. "It is an error to believe that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church."

21. "It is an error to believe that the Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion."

24. "It is an error to believe that the Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect."

"On the 18th of June, 1871, responding to a deputation of French Catholics, Pius IX spoke thus:

'Atheism in legislation, indifference in matters of religion, and the pernicious maxims which go under the name of Liberal Catholicism are the true causes of the destruction of states; they have been the ruin of France. Believe me, the evil I denounce is more terrible than the Revolution, more terrible even than The Commune. I have always condemned Liberal Catholicism, and I will condemn it again forty times over if it be necessary."
54. "It is an error to believe that Kings and princes are not only exempt from the jurisdiction of the Church, but are superior to the Church in deciding questions of jurisdiction."
55. "It is an error to believe that The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church."
77. "It is an error to believe that In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship."
78. "It is an error to believe that Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship."
79. "It is an error to believe that Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism."
[The meaning of this is: that it is the view of the Vatican that freedom of worship, and freedom of speech, tend to corrupt the morals and minds of the people and to propogate indifferentism.]

"The Anglican Church Times saw the pope as the divider rather than uniter of Christendom and greeted the encyclical with 'disgust and derision'. The leader-writer pointed out that Pius had no sympathy with civilization, progress, science or intellect. He looked on these as `deadly enemies of faith'."
The comment of The (London) Times was the shrewdest: `There is scarcely a political system in Europe, except the the Papal (Vatican) Government that does not rest on principles which are here declared to be damnable errors. '
This was true. Throughout the nineteenth century, the papacy, had been pressuring governments to deny their citizens those rights
which were denied citizens in the Papal States. From 1831 the popes
attacked each new constitution - the Austrian, French, Belgian - as 'godless'. Why? Because they dared like atheists to grant freedom of conscience; freedom of the press; free parliamentary institutions for which all were entitled to vote, regardless of their religion or lack of it;
complete equality of all citizens before the law. The papacy kept
urging other Italian states to imitate its own repression.
For example, in 1852, Pius IX persuaded Tuscany to
forbid Jewish doctors to practise medicine.
The overriding impression given was: The one thing Rome cannot abide is freedom in any form." pp. 246-7

According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanism_(heresy), "The (Irish-American majority of) bishops at this time came to share American ideals of liberalism. Therefore they allowed their members to join groups led by Protestants. They also emphasized the role of the laity more than some felt acceptable. Cardinal Gibbons and others indicated the priests should "go to the people" rather than the other way around. The vows of obedience in many religious orders seemed threatened because they may contradict American ideals of independence. American bishops allegedly felt harmony between different faiths would be benefitted if Catholicism downplayed its notion of being "the One Holy Apostolic Church." They also felt that separation of church and state should be supported instead of hoping that the United States could some day turn into a Roman Catholic nation. Finally the "heresy" believed Catholics should attend public school, read whatever they want, and express pride in a majority-Protestant nation."

See also the lengthy article on what orthodox Catholics consider an abomination:

Lest there be any doubt how the control of the Roman Catholic Church shifted from the Liberals in high places for a brief period when John XXIII was elevated to the papacy and they prevailed on a few issues during the Second Vatican Council, see
the 33 day papacy of the ultra-Liberal John Paul the First, where we show that the ultra-Conservatives would stop at nothing - including the murder of at least one liberal pope and of several liberal papal electors (i.e. cardinals) in order to get the Catholic Church back into total Conservative control..

America's Roman Catholic Right Wing

The "Religious Right" is more than Fundamentalists and theocrats like Pat Robertson and Gerry Falwell. These celebrities represent the Protestant wing of the Religious Right, but the Vatican Curia, Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and most of the bishops whom they have appointed and control throughout the world represent the Catholic wing of the "Religious Right". Many people are under the illusion that because the Catholic hierarchy in the United States has been fairly liberal in the past that they are an exception. But the fact is that just about every bishop in the U.S. today was hand-picked by Pope John Paul II, because he agreed to a large extent with his ultra-conservative world view. (One famous exception in America today is Bishop Thomas Gumbleton who is quite Liberal, but was nothing but a powerless "auxiliary bishop" for his entire 38 year career, since he was appointed by Pope Paul VI.) The U.S.A.'s conservative prelates may not agree on every detail of the Religious Right's agenda, but the following shows that they agree with them enough to make them allies when and where it counts&nbsp:
See if you can detect any difference between the purpose of the "voter guides" promoted by the largely Protestant "Christian Coalition" and those distributed at Catholic Churches in the 2004 election and promoted at:

"Do not reward with your vote candidates who are right on lesser issues but who are wrong on key moral issues. One candidate may have a record of voting exactly as you wish, aside from voting also in favor of, say, euthanasia. Such a candidate should not get your vote. Candidates need to learn that being wrong on even one of the non-negotiable issues is enough to exclude them from consideration."

Conservative U.S. Bishops who have taken public actions against liberal Democratic politicians for not towing the conservative Catholic line regarding abortion:

Pope John Paul II

Pope Benedict XVI (and Cardinal Ratzinger)

Cardinal McCarrick, Archbishop of Washington DC,

Cardinal Dulles, Professor of Religion at Fordham U,

Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, Denver, CO.

Archbishop John Myers of Newark, NJ.

Archbishop John Vlasny of Portland, OR.

Archbishop Raymond Burke, of St. Louis, Missouri

(formerly bishop of the Diocese of La Crosse, WI).

Archbishop Elden F. Curtis of Omaha, NB.

Archbishop John F. Donoghue, of Atlanta, GA.

Bishop Robert J. Baker of of Charleston, SC.

Bishop Robert J. Carlson of Sioux Falls, SD,

Bishop Peter J. Jugis of Charlotte, NC.

Bishop Emeritus R H Gracida of Corpus Christi, TX.

Bishop Michael J.Sheridan of Colorado Springs, CO.

Bishop Samuel J. Aquila, of Fargo, ND,

Bishop Wenski (coadjutor) of Orlando, FA,

Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz of the Lincoln, NB

See their actual statements at :

[ from http://www.ewtn.com/vote/Catholic_Politicians/index.asp ]

If anyone knows of a bishop who has taken a public stance on the other side, i.e. in defense of liberal Democratic public servants in the U.S.A. in this millenium, please bring it to my attention. I promise to publish it here.

Pope John Paul II (& Benedict XVI) opposed to any choice :
After persuading German legislators to require that women seeking an abortion first go for counseling and thereafter produce a certificate to prove that they had done so, the Vatican then ordered the Catholic Bishops to deny requests for such certificates from Catholic women : news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/456638.stm

Washington, D.C. – "Frustrated that so many Catholic politicians support abortion rights, the bishops of the United States said yesterday that they will begin evaluating whether they can impose sanctions against elected officials who vote contrary to church teachings.
In a freewheeling discussion reflecting years of concern, some bishops suggested that the church should consider punishments ranging from denying honorary degrees to elected officials, refusing to allow them to speak at Catholic institutions, or even excommunicating them.
The bishops said they were prompted to act by a document issued in January by Pope John Paul II. That document outlined the responsibilities of Catholics actively involved in politics. Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, the archbishop of Washington, suggested that the bishops examine how they should deal with Catholic politicians who do not heed the Vatican's urgings."

"The Roman Catholic bishop of Colorado Springs has issued a pastoral letter saying that American Catholics should not receive communion if they vote for politicians who defy church teaching by supporting abortion rights, same-sex marriage, euthanasia or stem-cell research."
Several bishops in the United States have warned that they will deny communion to Catholic politicians who fail to stand with the church, but Bishop Michael J. Sheridan of Colorado Springs is believed to be the first to say he will extend the ban to Catholic voters. . .
"Anyone who professes the Catholic faith with his lips while at the same time publicly supporting legislation or candidates that defy God's law makes a mockery of that faith and belies his identity as a Catholic," Bishop Sheridan wrote.
In a telephone interview, the bishop said: "I'm not making a political statement. I'm making a statement about church teaching."
Opposition to abortion "trumps all other issues," he wrote, and gay marriage is "deviancy." In the interview, the bishop said that his aim was to clarify the standards for Catholic voters and that he hoped they applied them in their choice of candidates. He said that on the "basic moral teachings of the church,'' there is no "wiggle room.". . . He also said he hoped to reform the "cafeteria Catholics" who believed it was acceptable to pick and choose the doctrines they agreed with. . . "I pray for them, but it could very well mean they're going to go their own way,'' he said. "You never like to see it, but it happens."
The bishop wrote that Catholics who vote contrary to church teaching "jeopardize their salvation.". . . He said they would be denied communion "until they have recanted their positions and been reconciled with God and the church in the sacrament of penance."

Communion Barred to Abortion Supporters

August 4, 2004
By The Associated Press

Atlanta (AP) – Roman Catholic bishops in three
Southeastern dioceses said Wednesday they will deny
Communion to lawmakers who consistently support abortion
rights unless the dissenting politicians publicly recant.
The bishops said in a statement that Catholics who violate
church teaching in policy-making were ``cooperating in evil
in a public manner.''
The banned Catholic lawmakers could resume taking the
sacrament ``only after reconciliation with the church has
occurred, with the knowledge and consent of the local
bishop, and public disavowal of former support for procured
abortion,'' the clerics said.
``There can be no contradiction between the values bestowed
by baptism and the Catholic faith and the public expression
of those values,'' the bishops said.
The announcement by Archbishop John Donoghue of Atlanta,
Bishop Robert Baker of Charleston, S.C., and Bishop Peter
Jugis of Charlotte, N.C., brings to four the number of
American bishops who said they would deny the sacrament
outright to defiant politicians.

(then) Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis said in January (2004) he
would refuse Communion to Democrat John Kerry, a Catholic
who supports abortion rights. However, the three Southern
bishops appeared to go further, by setting up strict
requirements for the prohibition to be lifted.
Bishop Baker, in a separate statement to his diocesan clergy, said
parish priests would not be allowed to decide whether a
public figure is worthy of resuming Communion: ``That
determination is reserved to me personally.''
About a dozen other U.S. bishops have stopped short of a
ban, urging Catholic politicians who back abortion rights
to voluntarily abstain from taking Communion instead. And
another group of prelates has said the sacrament should not
be used as a sanction. Their statements, during a
tight presidential race, have left bishops open to accusations
of partisanship and
sparked a national debate over religion and politics.
Kerry is the first Catholic presidential nominee on a major
party ticket since John F. Kennedy ran in 1960. President
Bush is a Methodist whose position on abortion is more in
line with the (Catholic) church.
The bishops deny they are attempting to influence voters
and say they are concerned only with preserving core,
unequivocal church teachings on preserving life. Communion
affirms a Catholic's bond with God, and asking a
parishioner not to participate is a harsh punishment in the
church."

Georgia state Rep. Mickey Stephens, a Democrat who supports
abortion rights, denounced the bishops' stance.
``I don't think they banned any of those priests who
committed those horrible crimes against little boys. I
don't know why they're singling out politicians,'' said
Stephens, who worships in the Savannah Diocese and will not
be affected by the Communion ban.
``I'm against abortion, but I don't think the government
has the right to tell a woman what to do,'' Stephens said.
``I also don't think the Catholic Church should be getting
into politics.''
The bishops' decision affects at least 200 churches in
Georgia and the Carolinas.

Bishops told to take hard line on issue of gender
The Guardian ,July 31, 2004,

The Pope will call on leaders of the Roman Catholic church today to attack feminist ideologies which assert that men and women are fundamentally the same.
The Vatican is concerned that this belief is eroding what it regards as women's maternal vocation. But a paper on the subject which is due to be published today - the Vatican's third major pronouncement on women's role in the quarter century of John Paul's papacy - has drawn scornful criticism from feminists and academics.
According to a leaked extract, the document accuses feminists of "blurring the biological difference between man and woman".Guardian.co.uk/pope/story/0,12272,1273140,00.html.

When Pope John Paul II arrived at the pearly gates, he got this unexpected
greeting from St. Peter, "Frankly, you're lucky to be here, John
Paul.""Why?" the pope responded, "What did I do that was so bad?""God was very angry", St. Peter answered, "with your preventing the
ordination of women .""God's upset about
THAT?", John Paul querried.
St. Peter explained, "Not just upset; She's furious."

An important lesson from the history of Catholic opposition to Birth Control :

"Between the years of approximately 1948 to 1963, the Catholic bishops of New England lobbied furiously against the legalization of contraception. This story is told in John McGreevy's brilliant new Catholicism and American Freedom, and if I could recommend one book to every Massachusetts Catholic senator / representative, this would be it. McGreevy's survey of the archives has found letters and memos in which the bishops acknowledged that they had to throw in the towel; they simply couldn't find Catholic legislators willing to go back into the ring and fight anymore.
John Ford, a Jesuit moral theologian who was the most aggressive proponent of the anticontraception stance (and taught in Weston, Mass.) admitted letter that the "natural law" argument had failed; if the point of "natural law" arguments was to convince any "rational person" (unlike, e.g., Scripture, which would convince only a religious believer), and if all these rational persons were rejecting the Catholic position, then what did that say about the law's "natural" aspect?
Eventually, the bishops abandoned this fight and made a distinction between public policy and personal religious practice. While Catholics themselves might be forbidden to use contraception, it was not necessary that this be imposed on public policy in a democracy. The implications for current events of this distinction made by the New England bishops in the early 1960s are instructive. In the end, Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) rendered the point moot and established the principle of a "right to privacy." As McGreevy points out, the New England bishops' intransigence on the contraception issue led, unexpectedly, to the establishment of the principle by which Roe v. Wade would legalize abortion. Once again, the episode proves that there is only one law of history: the law of unintended consequences."

Globe Columnist Eileen McNamara points to several recent examples of how backward-looking a number of the leaders of the Catholic Church are:

the Vatican hinting that "altar girls" should be discontinued.

Bishops refusing to include women in the symbolic ritual "washing of feet" recommended by Jesus.

Boston's Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley identifying "feminism" as one of the secular evils that make the United States "a hostile, alien environment" for Catholics {along with "the drug culture," "the sexual revolution," "hedonism," "consumerism," and "the culture of death" - which must include the clamor for the rights of gays to marry, somewhere in there}.

"Beyond his contempt for feminism and his veneration of obedience, O'Malley displayed his disdain for an entire generation, "the boomers born between 1946 and 1966." (O'Malley was born in 1944.) "The most educated and affluent group in US history," he said, "are heirs to Woodstock, the drug culture, the sexual revolution, feminism, the breakdown of authority, and divorce. Typically, they are religious illiterates."

Brielle, N.J. - An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot eat wheat has had her first Holy Communion declared invalid because the wafer contained no wheat, violating Roman Catholic doctrine.
Now, Haley Waldman's mother is pushing the Diocese of Trenton and the Vatican to make an exception, saying the girl's condition should not exclude her from the sacrament, which commemorates the Last Supper of Jesus Christ before his crucifixion. The mother believes a rice Communion wafer would suffice.
"It's just not a viable option. How does it corrupt the tradition of the Last Supper? It's just rice versus wheat," said Elizabeth Pelly-Waldman.
Church doctrine holds that Communion wafers, like the bread served at the Last Supper, must have at least some unleavened wheat. Church leaders are reluctant to change anything about the sacrament.
"This is not an issue to be determined at the diocesan or parish level, but has already been decided for the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world by Vatican authority," Trenton Bishop John M. Smith said in a statement last week.
Haley was diagnosed with celiac sprue disease when she was 5. The disorder occurs in people with a genetic intolerance of gluten, a food protein contained in wheat and other grains. When consumed by celiac sufferers, gluten (pronounced GLOO'-ten) damages the lining of the small intestine, blocking nutrient absorption and leading to vitamin deficiencies, bone-thinning and sometimes gastrointestinal cancer.
The diocese has told Haley's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten wafer, or just drink wine at Communion, but that anything without gluten does not qualify. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying her child could be harmed by even a small amount of the substance.
Haley's Communion controversy isn't the first. In 2001, the family of a 5-year-old Massachusetts girl with the disease left the Catholic church after being denied permission to use a rice wafer. Some Catholic churches allow no-gluten hosts, while others do not, said Elaine Monarch, executive director of the Celiac Disease Foundation, a California-based support group for sufferers. "It is an undue hardship on a person who wants to practice their religion and needs to compromise their health to do so," Monarch said.
The church has similar rules for Communion wine. For alcoholics, the church allows a substitute for wine under some circumstances, however the drink must still be fermented from grapes and contain some alcohol. Grape juice is not a valid substitute.
Haley, a shy, brown-haired tomboy who loves surfing and hates wearing dresses, realizes the consequences of taking a wheat wafer. "I'm on a gluten-free diet because I can't have wheat. I could die," she said last week.
Last year, as the third grader approached Holy Communion age in this Jersey Shore town, her mother told officials at St. Denis Catholic Church in Manasquan that the girl could not have the standard host. After the church's pastor refused to allow a substitute, a priest at a nearby parish volunteered to offer one, and in May, Haley wore a white Communion dress, and received the sacrament alongside her mother, who had not taken Communion since she herself was diagnosed with the disease. Last month, the diocese told the priest that the church would not validate Haley's sacrament because of the substitute wafer.
"I struggled with telling her that the sacrament did not happen," said Pelly-Waldman. "She lives in a world of rules. She says `Mommy, do we want to break a rule? Are we breaking a rule?'" Pelly-Waldman is seeking help from the Pope and has written to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, challenging the church's policy. "This is a church rule, not God's will, and it can easily be adjusted to meet the needs of the people, while staying true to the traditions of our faith," Pelly-Waldman wrote in the letter.
Pelly-Waldman — who is still attending Mass every Sunday with her four children — said she is not out to bash the church, just to change the policy that affects her daughter. "I'm hopeful. Do I think it will be a long road to change? Yes. But I'm raising an awareness and I'm taking it one step at a time," she said.

"Benedict, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, spearheaded a Vatican campaign against same-sex unions in 2003, issuing guidelines for Catholic politicians to oppose laws granting legal rights to gay couples when he was prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The former cardinal also frequently voiced the church's opposition to abortion "
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/pope&printer=1

"Doctors or other health care providers could not be disciplined or
sued if they refuse to treat gay patients under legislation passed by the Michigan House.
The bill allows health care workers to refuse service to anyone on moral, ethical or religious grounds.
The Republican dominated House passed the measure as dozens of
Catholics looked on from the gallery. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which pushed for the bills, hosted a legislative day for Catholics on Wednesday at the state Capitol."

A Roman Catholic priest caused a stir on the House floor Tuesday (4/13/04), when he urged lawmakers (in the U.S. House) to "be the antithesis of John Kennedy."
While delivering the chamber's morning prayer, the Rev. Bill Carmody said: "Almighty God, please change and convert the hearts of all the representatives in this House. May they be the antithesis of John Kennedy, may they be women and men of God, and may their faith influence and guide every vote they make," he said.
("Rep. Bill Sinclair, a Republican, defended Fr. Carmody, telling lawmakers the prayer was not an attack on Kennedy.")

Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004
Justice Anne M. Burke, the interim head of the review board (of the U.S. Catholic Church clerical abuse problems) :
"Nothing – I will say this again – nothing could have adequately prepared one for the encounter with the politics of the institutional church. And I say that having a husband who has been an elected public official for the past 36 years." . . . Her husband is Chicago Alderman Edward Burke. "I have been around Chicago politics for a long time ... but the machinations encountered in the ecclesiastical version during this period of fear, perplexity and suspicion was at times medieval, certainly Byzantine," she said.

Mel Gibson was interviewed by the Herald Sun in Australia, and the reporter asked the star if Protestants are denied eternal salvation. "There is no salvation for those outside the Church," Gibson replied. "I believe it." He elaborated:
"Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She's a much better person than I am. Honestly. She's, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it's just not fair if she doesn't make it, she's better than I am. But that is a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it."

Mel Gibson has a great deal of respect for his 85 year old father, Hutton Gibson, who has spent years writting ultra-Conservative screeds denying the Jewish Holocaust and denouncing the Roman Catholic Church's Second Vatican Council, After calling for "complete destruction" of the post-Vatican II church, about which he wrote, "To any who impede (his idea of orthodox pre-Vatican Catholicism), to all who promoted the current deviation, through act or omission, we most heartedly wish the end they have chosen: May they roast eternally in the deepest pit of hell!"

"It is sometimes reported that a large number of Catholics today, do not adhere to the teaching of the Church on a number of questions; notably, sexual and conjugal morality, divorce and remarriage, some are reported as not accepting the Church's clear position on abortion. It has also been noted that there is a tendency on the part of some Catholics to be selective to their adherence to the Church's moral teaching. It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is totally compatible with being a "good Catholic" and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error that challenges the teaching office of the Bishops of the United States and elsewhere."

"Michael Novak, an intellectual leader of Catholic neoconservatives, along with University of Notre Dame professor of medieval studies Ralph McInerny, launched Catholicism in Crisis in 1982. The publication provided a voice for conservative critics of the American hierarchy at a time when the U.S. Bishops Conference was preparing pastoral letters on war and the economy. "
"Theologically, Crisis was conservative, backing Pope John Paul II and critical of those whose interpretations of the Second Vatican Council differed from those offered by Rome. Over the years, the magazine's contributing editors and publication committee would become a who's who of conservative Catholicism: papal biographer George Weigel, Nurturing Network president Mary Cunningham Agee, former Drug Czar William Bennett, former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, CEO J. Peter Grace, former Secretary of State Alexander Haig, former baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn, former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican Thomas Melady, Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, novelist Walker Percy, former Treasury Secretary William Simon, and political activist Paul Weyrich among them."
. . . Deal Hudson "He secured support from the right-leaning Bradley and Scaife foundations that would total more than six figures; Domino's Pizza, owned by conservative Catholic activist Tom Monahan, signed up for 1,000 subscriptions."

Father John McCloskey is a graduate from Columbia, who was a Wall Streeter who worked at Citibank and Merrill Lynch before becomikng a priest and the the director of the Opus Dei-run the Catholic Information Center of Washington, D. C. Among his well known converts are CNBC supply-side economic analyst Lawrence Kudlow, and U.S. Senator Sam Brownback or journalist Robert Novak.

"A powerful faction of religious and political conservatives is waging a latter-day counterreformation, battling widespread efforts to liberalize the American Catholic Church. And it has the clout and the connections to succeed.
The conservative opposition is tied in to the elites of Washington, D.C. – McCloskey's high-profile catechumens are hardly the only example – and its magazines and think tanks are funded by the same foundations that have been the fountainhead of movement conservatism over the past three decades. And just as the clergy sexual abuse scandal energized the reformers, it energized the traditionalists.
"That's where the leadership and the power of the church are right now, no question," says the Rev. Richard McBrien, a theologian at the University of Notre Dame. "These people have direct access to the papacy."

Also Excerpted from the above:

Pope John Paul II

"During his 25-year pontificate, the pope has allied himself with the traditionalist side of every ongoing dispute within the Catholic Church. He's done so in his 2,400 public speeches and in his 14 encyclicals and in the fact that he has named 130 of the 135 cardinals who will vote on his eventual successor. He's even done so in the 477 saints he's canonized, more than the combined total of his 17 immediate predecessors. These latter-day saints include Jose Maria Escriva de Balaguer, the Spanish founder of the Opus Dei movement.
Opus Dei, an influential lay order with an estimated 80,000 members in 80 countries, is both a particular favorite of the pope's and an example of another way in which he has managed to put his personal stamp on every part of the church – in this case, the laity. The society has been controversial, and its secretive nature and its ability to ally itself with centers of power both inside and outside the church have turned Opus Dei into a potent force, an influential, deeply connected, and well-financed faction – a counterreformation, to borrow a useful term from Roman Catholic history – that was determined not only to prevent the scandal from being used as a Trojan horse for all manner of church reform but also to use its efforts within the church to affect the politics and culture outside of it."

Bishops Tighten (Conservative) Control

Richmond's new Bishop, Francis Di Lorenzo, who replaced
Bishop Walter Sullivan only four months ago, has discontinued the
diocesan "sexual minorities" commission which had advised Sullivan on
gay and lesbian concerns. Di Lorenzo also appointed a theological
watchdog, Fr. Russel E. Smith, who must grant approval for all parish
speakers. "Every case will be decided according to the same standard:
orthodoxy" said Smith, whose duties include investigating complaints
that lay people are preaching at worship. DiLorenzo also removed a
woman from the diocesan women's commission because she supported
women's ordination. (America, 8/13/2004).
Bishop Robert Vasa of the Baker, Oregon diocese is
requiring parishioners involved in parish catechetical and liturgical
ministries to assent to an "Affirmation of Personal Faith" or
withdraw from ministry. The Affirmation includes a list of a dozen
doctrinal statements including teaching on contraception, chastity,
homosexuality, marriage, abortion, Mary, hell, purgatory, the Real
Presence, and the authority of the church. Many see no room for
individual conscience and the regulation has polarized Catholics in
the diocese. In one parish over 24 people withdrew from ministry
rather than give their assent. Fr. James Coriden, a canon lawyer at
Washington Theological Union found it to be "unparalleled in our day
to ask for statements of personal faith of such length, detail and
complexity...what is odd here is the long list and odd selection of
truths or affirmations." Paul Dean, a youth minister offered to
affirm the Nicene Creed instead because "My personal conscience will
not allow me to affirm a document that does not accurately reflect
the totality of church teaching on moral decision-making and forming
one's personal conscience." Dean's situation is still unresolved.
(National Catholic Reporter, p. 13 July 2, 2004)

Another early action of the new Pope Benedict was to have the fairly Liberal Jesuit editor of the magazine America removed from that post.

"After the election of Pope Benedict XVI, (the Catholic magazine) America ran an editorial that said: "A church that cannot openly discuss issues is a church retreating into an intellectual ghetto."
The order to dismiss the editor, the Rev. Thomas J. Reese, was issued by the Vatican's office of doctrinal enforcement - the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerlty known as "The Holy Inquisition") - in mid-March when that office was
still headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the officials, who spoke
on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak
on the matter. (But it didn't take effect until the month followng the election.)
In recent years America has featured articles representing more than
one side on sensitive issues like same-sex marriage, relations with
Islam and whether Catholic politicians who support abortion rights
should be given communion. Church officials said it was the
publication of some of these articles that prompted Vatican scrutiny.
Catholic scholars and writers said in interviews yesterday that they
feared that the dismissal of such a highly visible Catholic
commentator was intended by the Vatican as a signal that debating
church teaching is outside the bounds.
Some Jesuits said that within the last two years they had received
spoken or written warnings from then-Cardinal Ratzinger's office
about articles or books they had published."
[from "Vatican Is Said to Force Jesuit Off Magazine,"by Laurie Goodstein
Published: May 7, 2005, in the N.Y. Times.

According to the famous American writer, Father Andrew Greely,
writing for http://www.beliefnet.com/story/106/story_10626_1.html ,

"As I read the recent comments of Vatican apparatchiks about the sex abuse crisis in this country, I wonder whether they are trying to destroy Catholicism in America or themselves.
Thus if we are to believe a certain Archbishop Herranz, who sat in on the meeting with American cardinals and the Pope, the crisis is the result of the American news media and legal system. It's also the fault of American bishops' timidity in paying large settlements to the victims of abuse. Herranz blames the whole crisis on homosexuals, and castigates U.S. bishops for reporting sexual abuse accusations to civil authorities and turning over files to prosecuting attorneys. Ironically, Archbishop Herranz presides over the Vatican's Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts.
Gianfranco Ghirlanda S.J., dean of Canon Law at the Pontifical Gregorian University, argued in the Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica that bishops are not morally or legally responsible for what priests do. According to him, bishops should not make priests take psychological tests, should not report accusations to civil authorities, and should not inform parishes when a priest is reassigned.
Finally, a certain Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga of Honduras (a serious contender for election to the papacy in 2004) was quoted by NCR writer John Allen as saying that attention to the pedophile crisis in the media detracts from attention to the war in the Middle East, that the money in the suits should not be given to lawyers or to the victims but to a fund for spirituality, that every time money mixes with justice it becomes unjust, and that he would be prepared to go to jail rather than harm one of his priests. "

Do you know what the most important building in North America is? At http://www.stas.org/whoweare/stas.shtml, the official web site of a little known Catholic Seminary which was dedicated on October 8, 1988, we are given the answer. According to the visiting megalomaniac Superior General of the Dominican Order, Fr. Franz Schmidberger, it is this St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Wisc.
The following is a summary of a lengthy interview published in one of the largest Spanish daily papers, "El Paris," on November 7, 1984."

In Latin America the crisis is due, according to Ratzinger, to "Marxist influences," and affirms that dialogue with the liberation theologians is impossible since "they accept as fact the illusionary goal of utilizing the class struggle as a means of achieving reforms and eliminating misery and injustice." In Europe and the United States, the crisis lies in "permissive morality" and blames North American theologians, "who have not been capable of defending Catholic ethics as being reasonable."
What we need badly now, says Ratzinger, is to create bishops "who are capable of opposing with strength the negative worldly tendencies," in as much as "he is totally ignorant of the nature of the Church and the nature of the world, who believes that these two can meet without conflict or that they be somehow mixed." Therefore we must urgently oppose "the many worldly cultural tendencies adopted by post-conciliar euphoria."
Extremely harsh also were the words used by Ratzinger in passing judgment on other religions: "After the Council," he says, "their value has been over emphasized; paganism painted as being serene and innocent is one of the illusions of our time. In fact, there exists the active presence of the devil, and from this only Christ can free us. For this reason we must continue to preach Christianity to these non-Christian religions (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Budhism, Mormanism) which are in many instances reigns of terror."

"More and more, in many countries of America, a system known as "neoliberalism" prevails; based on a purely economic conception of the human person, this system considers profit and the law of the market as its only parameters, to the detriment of the dignity of and the respect due to individuals and peoples. At times this system has become the ideological justification for certain attitudes and behavior in the social and political spheres leading to the neglect of the weaker members of society. Indeed, the poor are becoming ever more numerous, victims of specific policies and structures which are often unjust." [from Ecclesia in America (No. 56), Report of the Synod of America]

WHAT IS NEOLIBERALISM?

Neoliberalism is known in the United States as neoconservatism. Its Catholic proponents are Fr. John Neuhaus, George Weigel, Michael Novak and Fr. Robert Sirico. Their publications are available through the American Enterprise Institue, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, the Acton Institute and First Things magazine.
1. The ideology of the Invisible Hand of the Market. The authority of the market is unchallenged. For many it is higher than God–an 'idolatry of the market' (Centesimus Annus, n.40).
2. Slave wages and unsafe working conditions in poor countries in maquiladoras (factories which belong to companies in the U.S. or other highly developed countries) and in some parts of the United States.
3. It is amazing that "free market" proponents are opposed to big government, but depend on the governments of wealthy nations for their protection in reaping enormous profits at the expense of the poor. Rather than laissez-faire, it is government- supported capitalism for the few.
4. Privatization of all public and state-owned enterprises.
5. Control of women's reproduction by companies, especially maquiladoras. Proof of no pregnancy frequently required.
6. Tax free zones (no help for the local community) and blackballing of union organizers wherever there are maquiladoras-arranged by the U. S. government.
7. Harsh austerity programs (Structural Adjustment) imposed on poor countries related to repayment of irresponsible loans from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.
8. A World Trade Organization controlled by rich nations to the detriment of poorer ones. A "Group of Eight" well-to-do countries whose representatives meet regularly to plan the world economy.
9. Enormous transnational companies and trade agreements which destroy small businesses.
10. Agribusinesses, operating on a huge scale, which make it im-possible for small farmers to succeed in any country. Large companies patent seeds and plants, which have been developed for centuries by indigenous peoples, stealing them from the poor of the earth.
11. Huge discrepancies between CEO's making millions of dollars and the salaries of their workers in the United States, as well as in maquiladoras. (A Wal-Mart clerk would have to work 312 years to match the 1997 pay of the Wal-Mart CEO).
12. Government economic policies separated from the common good, making the defeat of inflation the goal above all other economic goals (e.g., Alan Greenspan at the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department). A Catholic neoconservative has stated publicly that slave wages must be paid in poor countries in order to keep down inflation.
13. In neoliberalism the realization of social and ethical ideals is only in the response of the individual. It frees the state from any social and ethical responsibility. Thus, social policy is not necessary.
14. Neoliberalism is a cousin, maybe a first cousin of social Darwinism, where the fittest dictate all and take all.
15. Solidarity is out. Those who make money easily in this system with government support disavow the needy, deny funds for social needs, and blame the poor or their character or culture for their lack of material goods. Those who receive large stock bonuses often forget the worker who produced them.
16. Pernicious consumerist materialism promoted by advertising, even in poor, developing countries.
17. Neoliberalists/neoconservatives declare that the only alternatives to their policies are socialism or Communism. Not true! There are other ways! (e.g., Jeff Gates, The Ownership Solution, Addison Wesley, 1998.
Houston Catholic Worker, Vol. XIX, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1999.

"When the Christian majority takes over this country, there will be no satanic churches, no more free distribution of pornography, no more talk of rights for homosexuals. After the Christian majority takes control, pluralism will be seen as immoral and evil and the state will not permit anybody the right to practice evil."
–Gary Potter, president of Catholics for Christian Political Action

"After the Zapatista uprising in 1994, Bishop Samuel Ruiz received international recognition when he was accepted as the mediator between the Mexican government and the Zapatista Liberation Assembly. He was nominated three times for the Nobel Peace Prize in the 1990s.
Bishop Ruiz has received numerous awards for his work to combat human rights violations in Mexico, including: The Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defender, UNESCO (Simon Bolivar Prize), and the Niwano Peace Prize.
First appointed Bishop of Chiapas by John XXIII in 1959, Ruiz was involved in all the sessions of the Second Vatican Council from 1962 to 1965. He also participated in the First Latin America Mission meeting in Melgar, and the Second General Conference of Latin America Bishops in Medellín, Colombia in 1968.
Under Bishop Ruiz's pastoral direction, it's been estimated that 44,000 indigenous refugees from the civil rights war in Guatemala received assistance from the Diocese of Chiapas.
Among other things, Bishop Ruiz is responsible for founding the Center of Human Rights, which addresses the violation of human rights of the indigenous people and peasants of Chiapas. He also initiated the National Indigenous Congress to promote collaboration among Mexico's indigenous communities.
In 1996 Ruiz was the subject of journalist Gary MacEoin's book The People's Church: Bishop Ruiz of Mexico and Why He Matters.

"In 1993 Mexico's conservative Apostolic Nuncio, Jeronimo Prigione, attempted to remove Ruiz from the San Cristóbal Diocese. Ruiz was defended by two other Mexican bishops, Arizmendi and Bishop Felipe Aguirre Franco of the Diocese of Tuxtla Gutierrez, also located in Chiapas. Arizmendi and Aguirre sent a letter praising Ruiz for his work among the indigenous communities of the diocese (SourceMex, Latin America Data Base, Lat. Am. Institute, UNM, Vol. 11, No. 4, Ap. 12).
The two bishops also stood by Ruiz when government officials tried to prevent him from acting as mediator in the civil conflict in Chiapas by asking them to serve as mediators instead. In a statement signed by all three bishops, they warned the government that the uprising of the EZLN should "serve as a warning of the danger of abandoning the country's marginalized groups" (SourceMex).
Arizmendi has criticized the EZLN for continuing an armed struggle, but has also supported "calls to greatly reduce the military presence in Chiapas" (SourceMex).
"A dialogue and a negotiation have to have the involvement of both sides," Arizmendi has said. "Both the Zapatista army and the federal army have to reach certain accords so there can be a reconsideration of the military presence."
La Jornada, the Mexican news daily, wrote of the appointment, "The Catholic hierarchy could well have taken advantage of this opportunity to name an individual who has closer ties to the so-called club of Rome. This individual could have potentially dismantled or significantly reversed the community networks that had been created with the faithful of the diocese, the majority of whom are poor Indians."
"Even though Arizmendi has shown some conservative tendencies, he is well versed on the conflicts in Chiapas and has shown solidarity with the Diocese of San Cristóbal de las Cases in the face of aggressions from local authorities and paramilitary groups" (in SourceMex).
Following his appointment, Arizmendi told a journalist, that he would continue the work of Ruiz and Vera. "Our challenge is to defend the rights of the poor and indigenous peoples of the region. And we will do this with great enthusiasm" (SourceMex).
Those close to the long-stalled peace talks in Chiapas hope the appointment will help inspire a new round of negotiations between the government and the EZLN.
The overwhelming presence of the Mexican army in the state – some 45,000 troops – has been a chief stumbling block in the negotiations, with the EZLN insisting that dialogue cannot proceed in a climate of intimidation and repression.
Arizmendi's appointment seems to have allayed the worst fears of Ruiz's supporters. When Ruiz retired, there was hope that his replacement would be Coadjutor Bishop Raúl Vera, appointed several years ago in a Vatican effort to rein in the prophetic Ruiz. Coadjutors are usually appointed with the expectation that they will succeed the bishop of the diocese to which they have been assigned.
Within months of his appointment, Vera, deeply affected by the extent of human rights violations and marginalization suffered by the majority of people in the diocese, became an outspoken advocate of their human, social and economic rights.
Ruiz's supporters were thus disappointed and deeply worried upon his retirement when Vera, to many people's surprise, was removed from the diocese and appointed to head the Archdiocese of Saltillo in the northern state of Coahuila. It has been rumored that the government lobbied heavily to have him removed from San Cristóbal.
Given these concerns, Bishop Ruiz seemed relieved at the appointment of Arizmendi. "We cannot hide our joy," he said (SourceMex).
In a farewell letter written to the people of the diocese, Ruiz says of Arizmendi that he "is familiar with Chiapas and the suffering of its people. He values our diocesan work, wishes to dialogue with all...and has a great respect for the culture and struggle of the poor" (Interpress Service, Ap. 25).
In saying goodbye to his diocese, Ruiz remarked with poignancy: "These have been long years in which together we have faced many difficulties, but with God's help and your strong hope, we observe with joy the strides made and a future full of possibilities for the poorest of the poor."
With Ruiz's departure, Mexico loses one of its last remaining exponents of liberation theology. Bishop Arturo Lona of the Diocese of Tehauntepec in Oaxaca, the last of this line of bishops, turns 75 later this year.
In a recent interview, Lona said that the impact of liberation theology will remain at the grassroots, in base communities and among the poor. It is the poor, he said, who "evangelize us and help us awaken the message of Jesus" (IPS).
He also criticized the "official" church and "my superiors" for their "obsession...with obedience and authority, which I believe is authoritarian at times. The church is hierarchical, but it really must be democratic, which is not a contradiction."
Former nuncio Prigione, who retired in 1997, has left a staunchly conservative imprint on the hierarchy in Mexico, having overseen the replacement of 86 of Mexico's 100 bishops over his 19 year tenure.
The country's newest Papal Nuncio, the recently-named Leonardo Sandri, is also a staunch conservative, opposed to the liberationist line."

[ from a site no longer on line. ]

Was Conservative opposition to "Liberation Theology"
behind the murder of at least one pope, if not many other high-ranking clergy?

KNIGHTS OF DARKNESS (and Conservativism)
The Sovereign Military Order of Malta

The Sovereign Military and Hospitaler Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta, or "S.M.O.M.", is juridically, politically, and historically unique in the world today.
Representing initially the most powerful and reactionary segments of the European aristocracy, for nearly a thousand years beginning with the early crusades of the Twelfth Century, it has organized, funded, and led military (& other) operations against states and ideas deemed threatening to its power. It is probably safe to say that the several thousand Knights of S.M.O.M., principally in Europe, North, Central, and South America, comprise the largest most consistently powerful and reactionary membership of any organization in the world today.
Although an exclusively [Roman] Catholic organization, in this century it has collaborated with, and given high awards to non-Catholic extremists in its current crusade against progressive forces in the West, the national liberation movements, and the socialist countries.
Just a few of its more famous American members : CIA directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone, President Reagan's Ambassador to the Vatican, William Wilson, James Buckley, William Buckley, Treasury Secretary William Simon, Jeremiah Denton (former Republican senator from Alabama), Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), Lee Iacocca (Ford & Chrysler Corp), Barron Hilton (Hilton Hotels), Clare Booth Luce (a Dame of SMOM),Father Bruce Ritter (founder and former director of Covenant House, Alexander Haig,, and J. Peter Grace, who is not only the President of W.R. Grace Company, but also the President of the American Eastern Association of S.M.O.M. As such, J. Peter Grace was a key figure in "Operation Paperclip", which brought 900 German scientists to the U.S. John Raskob, a high
ranking member of the Catholic Knights of Malta, had been chairman of the Democratic Party before F.D.R. and joined the attempted coup against President Roosevelt.
Franz von Papen: A leading figure in Hitler's coming to power was S.M.O.M. Franz von Papen, known as "the devil in a top hat." A devout Catholic aristocrat from an old family of Westphalian nobility, a former military attaché and spy against the United States in 1915, Von Papen became Chancellor in May 1932, with the support of the Nazis. In June he ordered the dissolution of the Reichstag, calling for new elections in July, in which the Nazis emerged as the largest party in the new Reichstag. After a meeting with Hitler, von Papen persuaded President von Hindenberg to offer Hitler the Chancellorship, which he assumed on January 30, 1933. Von Papen became his Vice-Chancellor. In April 1933 von Papen was elevated to Knight Magistral Grand Cross of S.M.O.M.. It was Vice-Chancellor Papen who represented the NAZI Reich in negotiating the infamous Concordat of 1933 with the Vatican, represented by Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pius XII. ( This is one of the reasons that John Cornwell called his book about Pius XII "Hitler's Pope". See www.CatholicArrogance.Org/RCscandal.html )
For more on this topic see: Group Watch at Vox News &

"Holy See" ? Isn't it amusing how English-speaking Catholic churchmen insist on translating the Latin "Sancta Sedes" into the meaningless "Holy See", instead of the correct, but silly–sounding "Holy Seat"?

a papal throne

In January 1997, "Jim" Nicholson, whom George W. Bush made his U.S. Ambassador the Holy See, was elected Chairman of the Republican National Committee . . . In his first year as Chairman, he broke all party records for fundraising, helping to win the stunning series of 1997 election victories now known as the Republican "Clean Sweep". . . Under Nicholson, the Republican Party won the Presidency, the Congress, a majority of Governorships, and state legislatures, a feat not done by Republicans in nearly fifty years.
In 1999, Nicholson was honored by induction as a Knight in the Sovereign Military Order of Malta. . .
Pope John Paul II elevated Opus Dei, with 72,000 members in 80 countries, to the status of a religious order.
Cardinal Spellman was the U.S. spiritual leader of the Knights of Malta.
Father E. Walsh created the Georgetown University Center for International Affairs and Strategic Studies became the first major CIA training center. This Jesuit priest was the motivating force behind Joe McCarthy's campaign against "communism" in the 50s, and he is a long-time member of the Knights of Malta.
Cardinal Avery Dulles – As the son of John Foster Dulles, then Secretary of State, and a nephew to Allen Dulles, then CIA director, young navy lieutenant Avery was assigned to help the Nazi War criminal Martin Bormann escape to Argentina. He then became a Jesuit priest, a theologian, and is now working as an advisor at Georgetown University. He also is a member of the Knights of Malta.

A survey by the Los Angeles Times has found that younger Catholic priests are "markedly more conservative" than older fellow priests. Clerics under the age of 41 were more supportive of the hierarchy and expressed less dissent against church teachings on abortion, contraception, homosexuality and other moral issues. Three-quarters of younger priests described themselves as "more religiously orthodox" than older priests.
Large majorities of older priests supported the ordination of married men and the creation of women deacons. A small majority supported the ordination of women. Two-thirds of younger priests opposed women deacons and women priests, although a small majority supported the ordination of married men.
One older priest, Father Vincent Inghilterra, 60, summarized what older priests believed about their parishioners, "The Catholic people will do what they feel is right in their hearts-with or without the blessing of the local priest." However, Father Matthew O'Donnell, 39, argued, "Beauty and liberty comes in accepting church teachings, not making your own theology." The poll included 1,854 priests in 80 US dioceses.

Pope Makes Opus Dei Leader Quickest Canonization
Pope John Paul II has canonized Jose Maria Escriva de Balaguer, the Spanish Roman Catholic priest and founder of the Opus Dei movement. Critics raised concerns about the speed of the canonization. While some canonizations take hundreds of years to take place, Escriva died in 1975 and was beatified in 1992. In 24 years Pope John Paul II has canonized more than 450 men and women- more than any other pope in history and twice as many as took place in the previous 400 years.
Opus Dei (God's work) has flourished under the current papacy, mainly due to its strict adherence to traditional church teachings. Despite having only 80,000 members in 80 countries, Opus Dei has considerable political and financial influence. Critics accuse Opus Dei of being secretive and elitist, as well as utilizing cult-like recruitment methods and allowing membership by invitation only. The Vatican's press spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, is a member.

See also :R. C. Church vs. Modernism
In the early 1900's the Catholic authorities used to distinguish between the two parts of the church the "ecclesia docens" and the "ecclesia discens" meaning those who were teachers in the church and those who were learners. (see p. 110 of a great online book at Roman Catholicism And Modern Science: A History , (authored by a Catholic scientist named Don O'Leary and published in Great Britain in 2006).
U.S. Catholic newspaper, The National Catholic Reporter, published a list of 24 prominent theologians and others who had been silenced or subjected to various forms of papal discipline under Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger. The list includes such names as: Fr. Hans Küng, Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx, Fr. Charles Curran, Leonardo Boff, Fr. Gustavo Gutiérrez, Fr. Karl Rahner, Fr. Matthew Fox, a sister of Mercy Mary Agnes Mansour, the former archbishop of Seattle Raymond Hunthausen, Fr. Robert Nugent and Sr. Jeannine Gramick who ministered to homosexuals, a Brazilian Sister of Notre Dame Ivone Gebara and several others.
"Other American members or cooperators include the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court John Roberts, noted attorney Mary Ann Glendon, Judge Bork and his wife Mary Ellen, former US Solicitor General Ted Olson, Tom Monaghan (Domino's Pizza), Robert Novak, and of course, possibly Senator Rick Santorum–many of whom are connected with both the Project for the New American Century as well as the Institute on Religion and Democracy, two groups with very far right political agendas. "
[ http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/5/16/201710/016 ]

"Cardinal Ratzinger also shared John Paul II’s low opinion of American liberalism, and Western liberalism in general. In a 1984 interview, he suggested that being rich is a measure of one’s worth in North America and “the values and style of life proposed by [American] Catholics appear more than ever as a scandal.”"
[ http://www.bloggernews.net/116780 ]
http://xtremerightcorporate.blogspot.com/ is a site that makes no apologies about being both Roman Catholic and extreme right wing:
"The author of this site is a right-wing, Catholic, reactionary, monarchist, corporatist, fascist -insofar as "fascist" has become a blanket term with which to label the far-right. The author is not a great admirer of Adolf Hitler but IS an admirer of Engelbert Dollfuss, Francisco Franco, Msgr. Tiso, Ante Pavelic, and to varying degrees men like Charles Maurras, Leon Degrelle, Benito Mussolini, etc."
This web site is an interesting mix of historical information, misinformation, interesting pictures of important historical figures and plenty of sexy pictures of girls barely clad in fascist outfits.